Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Cavalier22 on March 25, 2007, 10:10:25 PM
-
I jst watched this 2 hour national geographic special on 9/11. Very well done and moving.
ANyone else catch it?
-
I suppose it was the "offical" story?
-
the "official story" can point out this, this, and this -all of the evidence.. these are the hijackers, these were the planes, these are the people who admit to it, heres the plane parts, here the dna, heres the witnesses..
the "unofficial story" has some youtube clips and some blurry pictures
-
exactly
-
the "official story" can point out this, this, and this -all of the evidence.. these are the hijackers, these were the planes, these are the people who admit to it, heres the plane parts, here the dna, heres the witnesses..
also here is the unharmed passport of one of the hijackers, and over in China are the building parts, here are the laymans who say as they are told, some dna even though we don't see blood...
exactly
-
it should be easy.
answer the WTC7 questions.
exactly.
-
my god 240,, we just went over the bbc thing.. bbc even gave the explination. are you fucking stupid?
-
my god 240,, we just went over the bbc thing.. bbc even gave the explination. are you fucking stupid?
1. What was their explanation?
2. Do you truly believe they lost every tape and backup from Sep 11, 2001?
-
also here is the unharmed passport of one of the hijackers, and over in China are the building parts, here are the laymans who say as they are told, some dna even though we don't see blood...
exactly
i thought 75% of people dont believe the official story.. guess that makes you the laymans.. dna even though we dont see blood? dna has nothing to do with blood. dna is in your hair, its in your skin cells. what evidence do you have. whos done your investigation? what have they done?
it takes a moron to believe a story with no evidence and no investigation. watching videos doesnt count. what about all of the scientists and engineers that can explain what happend. o yeah, there in on it too ::).. better be a laymens then a retard
-
1. What was their explanation?
2. Do you truly believe they lost every tape and backup from Sep 11, 2001?
you know exactly what it is. i could explain again like i did the last time,, but youll keep posting about it no matter what. i could tell you 1+1=2. but if you believe it equals 3 there no way to convince you
-
interesting that you have insults and namecalling. We have questions regarding evidence.
I guess you should stick with that. No one from your group will touch the evidence now. Can't blame em.
-
you know exactly what it is. i could explain again like i did the last time,, but youll keep posting about it no matter what. i could tell you 1+1=2. but if you believe it equals 3 there no way to convince you
do you believe they really lost all videos and backups, kh?
-
doesnt look lost to me
-
the "official story" can point out this, this, and this -all of the evidence.. these are the hijackers, these were the planes, these are the people who admit to it, heres the plane parts, here the dna, heres the witnesses..
the "unofficial story" has some youtube clips and some blurry pictures
My NYPD contacts at ground zero on 9-11 believe building 7 was "pulled".
-
My NYPD contacts at ground zero on 9-11 believe building 7 was "pulled".
Last month, 15 or 20 of them went on Alex Jones' radio show and said it was pulled. Some even said they heard the 20 second countdown.
Of course, the official story said it wasn't pulled and that it was a complete surprise when it fell. If it was pulled, at the very least, ol Larry committed insurance fraud to the tune of $480 million.
I guess people who don't want an investigation are a-okay with insurance fraud too. Cause if my house fell mysteriously, and there were 15 or 20 cops saying that I demolished it myself for insurance money, I'm guessing AllState would want an investigation before coughing up a paltry $200k. With the number up at $480 million, you'd really think they'd want to investigate.
-
i thought 75% of people dont believe the official story.. guess that makes you the laymans.. dna even though we dont see blood? dna has nothing to do with blood. dna is in your hair, its in your skin cells. what evidence do you have. whos done your investigation? what have they done?
it takes a moron to believe a story with no evidence and no investigation. watching videos doesnt count. what about all of the scientists and engineers that can explain what happend. o yeah, there in on it too ::).. better be a laymens then a retard
The opinion of thousands of scientists only counts when it supports their claims...see the global warming debates...
-
The opinion of thousands of scientists only counts when it supports their claims...see the global warming debates...
Big difference is, we are investigating global warming.
The 911 investigation was an underfunded, incomplete narrative which 4 of the 10 members of the Commission have come fwd saying it was incomplete and another was needed. And those are just the ones not afraid to piss off Bush.
Another 911 investigaiton will come. Did you see Dennis Kuscinich talking about one yesterday? It's rising to the surface from so many levels and directions and demographics that it's unstoppable at this point.
-
Big difference is, we are investigating global warming.
The 911 investigation was an underfunded, incomplete narrative which 4 of the 10 members of the Commission have come fwd saying it was incomplete and another was needed. And those are just the ones not afraid to piss off Bush.
Another 911 investigaiton will come. Did you see Dennis Kuscinich talking about one yesterday? It's rising to the surface from so many levels and directions and demographics that it's unstoppable at this point.
I wouldn't mind seeing an investigation, however I know that if the findings aren't inline with you and that crackhead Alex Jones' thinking you will dismiss them as more coverup.
-
what makes me laugh is that the government planned the biggets conspiracy in the history of man kind, involving 10s of thousands of people from all over the world, and the detail they left out was "what will people say about the bomb crater on WTC7"...LMAO! Yeah right, "oops I didn't think of that" yeah ok.....
-
what makes me laugh is that the government planned the biggets conspiracy in the history of man kind, involving 10s of thousands of people from all over the world, and the detail they left out was "what will people say about the bomb crater on WTC7"...LMAO! Yeah right, "oops I didn't think of that" yeah ok.....
10,000 people wouldn't be needed.
And did you see the bomb crater in wtc 6?
Click to open the image, zoom in. It's HUGE!
-
10,000 people wouldn't be needed.
And did you see the bomb crater in wtc 6?
Click to open the image, zoom in. It's HUGE!
Oh I know, they really fucked up overlooking that detail, what were they thinking?? I'm suprised you find time to dig up all these pics and everything with all the puss you must pull....... ;)
-
Oh I know, they really fucked up overlooking that detail, what were they thinking?? I'm suprised you find time to dig up all these pics and everything with all the puss you must pull....... ;)
oh, ok.
when confronted with a bomb crater in the streets of NYC, your response?
An insult about getting laid.
Yes. Well-constructed argument. Bravo.
-
dna even though we dont see blood? dna has nothing to do with blood. dna is in your hair, its in your skin cells. what evidence do you have.
Watched a few many CSI's have we, no shit sherlock I was reffering to flight 93 no traces of blood found.
"This is the most eerie thing," he says. "I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop." Coroner at the scene! Yet no firefighter efforts, and no dna information was ever attempted. Nice job Grisom, or do you watch NY cast.
-
Watched a few many CSI's have we, no shit sherlock I was reffering to flight 93 no traces of blood found.
"This is the most eerie thing," he says. "I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop." Coroner at the scene! Yet no firefighter efforts, and no dna information was ever attempted. Nice job Grisom, or do you watch NY cast.
Plus, NBC did a flyover right after the crash, before the feds arrived.
The hole was absolutely empty.
You can see the local NBC footage on google video if you want.
I guess no one here wants to touch that one tho... ;)
-
oh, ok.
when confronted with a bomb crater in the streets of NYC, your response?
An insult about getting laid.
Yes. Well-constructed argument. Bravo.
It isn't a bomb crater fool, you really think that would be the one detail overlooked by the plotters? I don't need to have a good argument, the onus of evidence is on you not me...
-
Watched a few many CSI's have we, no shit sherlock I was reffering to flight 93 no traces of blood found.
"This is the most eerie thing," he says. "I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop." Coroner at the scene! Yet no firefighter efforts, and no dna information was ever attempted. Nice job Grisom, or do you watch NY cast.
close, all my knowledge in law enforcement comes from third watch
-
It isn't a bomb crater fool, you really think that would be the one detail overlooked by the plotters? I don't need to have a good argument, the onus of evidence is on you not me...
Okay. Exhibit one - compare the WTC6 pics with the Ok city building - IDENTICAL.
-
Okay. Exhibit one - compare the WTC6 pics with the Ok city building - IDENTICAL.
So now a truck bomb brought down WTC6? I mean we can't compare a truck bomb to a missle...that would be like apples and opranges...
-
close, all my knowledge in law enforcement comes from third watch
For a second I was thinking Crimnal minds
-
So now a truck bomb brought down WTC6? I mean we can't compare a truck bomb to a missle...that would be like apples and opranges...
Well, perhaps you wnat to take a look at the pics from world trade center #6 and tell us what you think caused this massive crater in this 8 story building. It was not falling debris nor a collapse of WTC6 into the basement either. It's currently unexplained and very strange.
http://killtown.911review.org/wtc6.html
-
Well, perhaps you wnat to take a look at the pics from world trade center #6 and tell us what you think caused this massive crater in this 8 story building. It was not falling debris nor a collapse of WTC6 into the basement either. It's currently unexplained and very strange.
http://killtown.911review.org/wtc6.html
I saw your pics, and I guess you having an engineering degree you know that falling debris couldn't have caused it?
-
I saw your pics, and I guess you having an engineering degree you know that falling debris couldn't have caused it?
Uh huh.
Perhaps you want to take a look at the pics from world trade center #6 and tell us what you think caused this massive crater in this 8 story building.
Is your answer 'falling debris'?
-
Uh huh.
Perhaps you want to take a look at the pics from world trade center #6 and tell us what you think caused this massive crater in this 8 story building.
Is your answer 'falling debris'?
Sure...anything other than a missle
-
Sure...anything other than a missle
I agree with MM on this one.
-
Sure...anything other than a missle
Okay. can you rule out a bomb?
How are you qualified to make that assessment?
To the naked eye, it's a giant empty circular crater, very similar to what you see from bomb blasts.
Of course, since you can rule out missile, I'm sure you can tell us viable alternatives, right?
-
I agree with MM on this one.
thoughts?
-
Okay. can you rule out a bomb?
How are you qualified to make that assessment?
To the naked eye, it's a giant empty circular crater, very similar to what you see from bomb blasts.
Of course, since you can rule out missile, I'm sure you can tell us viable alternatives, right?
Okay. can you rule out falling debris?
How are you qualified to make that assessment?
and how many bomb craters have you stood in?
-
Okay. can you rule out falling debris?
How are you qualified to make that assessment?
and how many bomb craters have you stood in?
Neither of us can rule out anything.
There was no investigation into the destruction of WTC 6.
Do you believe they should have one?
-
Neither of us can rule out anything.
There was no investigation into the destruction of WTC 6.
Do you believe they should have one?
If you tell me how to post a pic on here, I will show you a crater from a bomb in Iraq, and you will see how big a bomb would have to be to make a hole like that AFTER hitting a building!
-
240, how did ronnie get so big?
-
Okay. can you rule out a bomb?
How are you qualified to make that assessment?
To the naked eye, it's a giant empty circular crater, very similar to what you see from bomb blasts.
Of course, since you can rule out missile, I'm sure you can tell us viable alternatives, right?
I know for SURE that 2 jetliners struck 2 buildings.
We can micro analyze ever hole and come up with 10 different 'stories'.
Too many BIG fish to fry w/ regards to #7 to worry about this crap.
-
This crater was from a 500lb bomb dropped from a B-1 at baghdad international. Even with a direct hit you can see how deep it is. So you tell me how big of a bomb it would take to go through a building and leave a crater 3-4 times this size...Yes I am in the pic
-
gee whiz, you're showing a hole in the dirt.
how about showing a building?
Here's a scary comparison:
WTC6 and Oklahoma City.
WTC6:
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=136243.0;attach=152370;image)
Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building:
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=136243.0;attach=152373;image)
-
This crater was from a 500lb bomb dropped from a B-1 at baghdad international. Even with a direct hit you can see how deep it is. So you tell me how big of a bomb it would take to go through a building and leave a crater 3-4 times this size...Yes I am in the pic
was this bomb a silent one,like they used at the wtc's?
-
was this bomb a silent one,like they used at the wtc's?
actually, WTC6's destruction occurred when the plane hit the south tower.
thank you, come again.
-
actually, WTC6's destruction occurred when the plane hit the south tower.
thank you, come again.
ok my fault. lol
-
actually, WTC6's destruction occurred when the plane hit the south tower.
thank you, come again.
You miss the point, if a 500lb bomb strikes an asphalt runway directly and only creates a hole 15 feet deep, 50 feet in diameter, how would a bomb cruise through a multi story building, THEN hit the concrete and leave a hole that appears to be at least twice that size. Explain that to me,
-
actually, WTC6's destruction occurred when the plane hit the south tower.
thank you, come again.
LMAO!! SO they were able to precisely time the missle and the plane but couldn't figure a way to not leave a crater and avoid speculation? You know what the chances are that they could make those 2 things happen at the exact same time? Maybe the 747 was actually loaded with bombs that it dropped on it's way to the WTC, But you couldn't see the bombs because Chris Angel (mind freak) designed an elaborate series of mirrors that made the bombs dissapear in exchange for oil profits from the war that would ensue....I am starting to put this story together!
-
You miss the point, if a 500lb bomb strikes an asphalt runway directly and only creates a hole 15 feet deep, 50 feet in diameter, how would a bomb cruise through a multi story building, THEN hit the concrete and leave a hole that appears to be at least twice that size. Explain that to me,
1) looks to me, really, like bombs. There's a scoop of that building gone.
2) if a missile, neither of us know what kind or capacity, and if it was a missile, it clipped the North tower, so predicting the impact of a high speed projectile which started breakup 800 feet above... well damn...
-
LMAO!! SO they were able to precisely time the missle and the plane but couldn't figure a way to not leave a crater and avoid speculation? You know what the chances are that they could make those 2 things happen at the exact same time? Maybe the 747 was actually loaded with bombs that it dropped on it's way to the WTC, But you couldn't see the bombs because Chris Angel (mind freak) designed an elaborate series of mirrors that made the bombs dissapear in exchange for oil profits from the war that would ensue....I am starting to put this story together!
whatever came form above clipped the corner of the north tower and was breaking up when it hit WTC6. And it landed right where that crater is. And, if it hadn't clipped WTC6, its path had it going directly, front and center, of WTC7.
Some believe it was an error. if it hadn't clipped, WTC7 would have a nice gaping crater, and that collapse owuld have been sellable.
-
whatever came form above clipped the corner of the north tower and was breaking up when it hit WTC6. And it landed right where that crater is. And, if it hadn't clipped WTC6, its path had it going directly, front and center, of WTC7.
Some believe it was an error. if it hadn't clipped, WTC7 would have a nice gaping crater, and that collapse owuld have been sellable.
I don't know man, you are right I am no bomb expert, but I have seen a bunch of craters and I would have to guess that to make a crater that size we are tlaking in the thousands of pounds and that would have taken down most of the buildings on that block and created a hell of a mushroom cloud
-
so they droped a bomb? huh? your a fucking piece of work
-
so they droped a bomb? huh? your a fucking piece of work
who are you talking to?
-
I honestly think it's explosives in the building or a bomb. Compared to OK city, they're practically identical. VERY odd, given that 'controlled demo, inc' was in town for a quick cleanup in both cases ;)
Look at the way every floor is sheared in a circle (in the pic i posted with OK city).
-
I honestly think it's explosives in the building or a bomb. Compared to OK city, they're practically identical. VERY odd, given that 'controlled demo, inc' was in town for a quick cleanup in both cases ;)
Look at the way every floor is sheared in a circle (in the pic i posted with OK city).
a bomb would be more believable, but I still don't buy it
-
Thee is a huge difference between what happened to those buidings and a 500lbs bomb going off. The pick MM showed was one dropped. I am trying to dig up one of a soviet 500lbs we found on Bagram and they detonated. Either way, the hole was immense and it shook the whole base..there is a huge difference...the explosions that may have taken buiding 7 would be small and timed and I think it would be very obvious to the point that nobody could cover up a controled detonation. There would be a huge cloud had that been one big bomb as well as flying debre that would make it obvious that this was a bomb and not falling wtc pieces.
-
a bomb would be more believable, but I still don't buy it
I'm just not sure falling RANDOM debris would/could do this. Clean sheared in a perfect circle, and debris is gone. These floors look sliced at the corners of support beams - that is seriously surgical.
WTC6 and Oklahoma City.
WTC6:
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=136243.0;attach=152370;image)
Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building:
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=136243.0;attach=152373;image)
-
Thee is a huge difference between what happened to those buidings and a 500lbs bomb going off. The pick MM showed was one dropped. I am trying to dig up one of a soviet 500lbs we found on Bagram and they detonated. Either way, the hole was immense and it shook the whole base..there is a huge difference...the explosions that may have taken buiding 7 would be small and timed and I think it would be very obvious to the point that nobody could cover up a controled detonation. There would be a huge cloud had that been one big bomb as well as flying debre that would make it obvious that this was a bomb and not falling wtc pieces.
perhaps it was a smaller bomb ala mcveigh. let's ignore whatever flew in from above. look at the impact zones.
WTC6 and Oklahoma City.
WTC6:
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=136243.0;attach=152370;image)
Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building:
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=136243.0;attach=152373;image)
-
who are you talking to?
not you. im not sure what 240's trying to explain. did they drop the bomb from an airplane? did the bomb float threw the floors of the building and land in the basement?
-
So u think possiby a guided missle..JDAM etc. It would have to be huge and I think anything that big would be recognizable as such. I think also the govenment would publicize such use of a weapon as even more reason to go to war.
-
240 your really killing yourself with the oklahoma bombing.. just read about the bombing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing
At 9:02 a.m. CST, the Ryder truck, which contained about 5,000 pounds (2,300 kg) of explosive material, detonated in front of the north side of the nine-story Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. The blast destroyed a third of the building[5] and created a thirty-foot-wide, eight-foot-deep crater on NW 5th Street next to the building.[6] The blast destroyed or damaged 324 buildings in a sixteen-block radius,[7] destroyed or burned 86 cars around the site, and shattered glass in 258 nearby buildings[8] (the broken glass alone accounted for 5% of the death total and 69% of the injuries outside the Murrah Federal building[9]). The destruction of the building left several hundred people homeless and shut down multiple offices in downtown Oklahoma City.[10]
An aerial view of the destructionThe effects of the blast were equivalent to 4,000 pounds of TNT and could be heard and felt up to fifty-five miles away.[10] Seismometers at the Omniplex Museum in Oklahoma City (7 kilometers away) and in Norman, Oklahoma (26 kilometers away) recorded the blast as measuring approximately 3.0 on the Richter scale.[11]
-
it looks like it. same company cleaned up quick. both shady and smelly.
and when the planes hit, and when the collapses happened, there was a bit of noise, no?
-
Okay. can you rule out falling debris?
How are you qualified to make that assessment?
and how many bomb craters have you stood in?
My vote is massive falling debris.
WTC 7..........was pulled though.
-
it looks like it. same company cleaned up quick. both shady and smelly.
and when the planes hit, and when the collapses happened, there was a bit of noise, no?
could be heard and felt up to fifty-five miles away.[10] Seismometers at the Omniplex Museum in Oklahoma City (7 kilometers away) and in Norman, Oklahoma (26 kilometers away) recorded the blast as measuring approximately 3.0 on the Richter scale.[11]
-
Im not buying this bomb/missile theory at all either.
But what does the official story say happened to that building? Falling debris?
-
this guy gives a great explination,, and hes a bush hater
&mode=related&search=
-
official story doesn't mention it, oddly.
you'd think 8 stories tall and what, 25 stories in diameter, being scooped out of the building would be interesting to some. I guess not.
-
Either the reason for it is too obvious to waste investigating or it should have been looked into.
-
official story doesn't mention it, oddly.
you'd think 8 stories tall and what, 25 stories in diameter, being scooped out of the building would be interesting to some. I guess not.
the official story doesnt mention what? the pic that supposed to be wtc7 is to close to see if it was scoped out. not all of the building collapsed. and if you look at OTHER wtc7 pics you would be able to figure this out..after the oklahoma bombing you can rule that out fot the wtc's
-
the official story doesnt mention what? the pic that supposed to be wtc7 is to close to see if it was scoped out. not all of the building collapsed. and if you look at OTHER wtc7 pics you would be able to figure this out..after the oklahoma bombing you can rule that out fot the wtc's
Nah, that's world trace SIX that has the scoop out of it.
-
1) looks to me, really, like bombs. There's a scoop of that building gone.
2) if a missile, neither of us know what kind or capacity, and if it was a missile, it clipped the North tower, so predicting the impact of a high speed projectile which started breakup 800 feet above... well damn...
240, with all due respect, I believe your starting to pull rabbits out of a hat.
-
240, with all due respect, I believe your starting to pull rabbits out of a hat.
different things will appeal to different people. Some will look at WTC7 fall (the 8 second clip from ggogle video shows all 47 stories vaporize) and be convinced.
Some will look at the fact a plane took out the exact group of people and their computers, who were in charge of the missing 2.3 Trillion announced the day before.
Some will look at the early NBC footage of shanksville crash site - before feds arrived - where it was an empty hole - NOTHING was there.
And finally, some will look at the that hole in WTC6, and the OK city bombing damage, and see incredible similirities. Maybe these people will also see the Customs and BATF info which conveniently was destroyed in its vaults in WTC6 in that massive blast, and wonder the motive. After all, everything that was damaged on 911 had a purpose- the pentagon precise dept hit, the first plane nailing paul bremer's computer room dead on, in WTC1, the WTC7 falling after being ground control for the day's activities...
you get the idea. different ideas, evidence, and motive grab diff people. Just going thru the spectrum :)
-
interesting that you have insults and namecalling. We have questions regarding evidence.
I guess you should stick with that. No one from your group will touch the evidence now. Can't blame em.
First you try to make a case based on rumors and youtube clips claiming those to be only real facts, and then you can't understand why everyone think you are stupid? Try to figure that out, or get someone to explain it to you. There isn't any physical evidence about the conspiracy, but there is tons of evidence which shows that everything happened like you saw it in live news feed which you watch in those days. What is the problem? You are so lame ass stupid child that you have choose to not believe facts instead of internet lies. How smart is that?
-
First you try to make a case based on rumors and youtube clips claiming those to be only real facts, and then you can't understand why everyone think you are stupid? Try to figure that out, or get someone to explain it to you. There isn't any physical evidence about the conspiracy, but there is tons of evidence which shows that everything happened like you saw it in live news feed which you watch in those days. What is the problem? You are so lame ass stupid child that you have choose to not believe facts instead of internet lies. How smart is that?
GreatFinn,
Do you believe the BBC has really lost every recording, tape, and archive from 9/11?
Do you believe they have no copy of their broadcast on 9/11/2001?
thanks.
-
different things will appeal to different people. Some will look at WTC7 fall (the 8 second clip from ggogle video shows all 47 stories vaporize) and be convinced.
Some will look at the fact a plane took out the exact group of people and their computers, who were in charge of the missing 2.3 Trillion announced the day before.
Some will look at the early NBC footage of shanksville crash site - before feds arrived - where it was an empty hole - NOTHING was there.
And finally, some will look at the that hole in WTC6, and the OK city bombing damage, and see incredible similirities. Maybe these people will also see the Customs and BATF info which conveniently was destroyed in its vaults in WTC6 in that massive blast, and wonder the motive. After all, everything that was damaged on 911 had a purpose- the pentagon precise dept hit, the first plane nailing paul bremer's computer room dead on, in WTC1, the WTC7 falling after being ground control for the day's activities...
you get the idea. different ideas, evidence, and motive grab diff people. Just going thru the spectrum :)
240, I'm definitely with you on # 7. Controlled Dem. No question about it. Men on the ground who I know very well, have told me there is NO OTHER EXPLAINATION.....or conclusion.
Shankville is a different story. The ground where the jet crashed was "Mined" for many, many yrs. When that occurs, the filled used to cover the Mined area is extremely soft, relative to normal dirt in an un-mined area. With this in mind, it no different than the Value Jet Crash in the Fla. Everglades...........The Jet DISAPPEARED. No one disputes that Value Jet didn't crash.....yet the Jet's remains were never recovered.
A passenger Jet crashed in Shankville (no doubt) and was "consumed" by the weak, soft earth. Human remains were also located at the crash site.
240......I'm on your side for the most part. It's only when you head out into "left field" that I disagree.
Discuss the obvious............never the obscure.
-
240, I'm definitely with you on # 7. Controlled Dem. No question about it. Men on the ground who I know very well, have told me there is NO OTHER EXPLAINATION.....or conclusion.
Shankville is a different story. The ground where the jet crashed was "Mined" for many, many yrs. When that occurs, the filled used to cover the Mined area is extremely soft, relative to normal dirt in an un-mined area. With this in mind, it no different than the Value Jet Crash in the Fla. Everglades...........The Jet DISAPPEARED. No one disputes that Value Jet didn't crash.....yet the Jet's remains were never recovered.
A passenger Jet crashed in Shankville (no doubt) and was "consumed" by the weak, soft earth. Human remains were also located at the crash site.
240......I'm on your side for the most part. It's only when you head out into "left field" that I disagree.
Discuss the obvious............never the obscure.
Good points!
I grow bored with WTC7. It's controlled demolition is a very obvious sign of foreknowledge, complicity, etc, and proof that there were more than 19 terrorists at work that morning. Also, the fact that it wasn't investigated, shows compliance on the investigatory level. WTC7 will be history's smoking gun of an inside job.
The other topics - who knows, maybe 10% of them I'm right on, maybe 90%, I dunno. Fun to think about though. Example on the WTC6 missile: If that *object* hadn't clipped the north tower, it would have barrelled directly into the base of WTC7, which would have created a big ugly gash, and would have made the WTC7 collapse quite believable. Or, maybe it was intentional to destroy #6- what was removed from those US customs safes which were claimed on insurance? The safes were obliderated and contents were insured. If one were going to do an inside job for money and power, removing goods then claiming them on insurance is a nice little sub-ploy. Fun to think about. Not very consequential. But - we gotta remember that the WTC7 talk also started as an outlandish silly theory. Now, most people will look at it and agree on controlled demo :)
-
Good points!
I grow bored with WTC7. It's controlled demolition is a very obvious sign of foreknowledge, complicity, etc, and proof that there were more than 19 terrorists at work that morning. Also, the fact that it wasn't investigated, shows compliance on the investigatory level. WTC7 will be history's smoking gun of an inside job.
The other topics - who knows, maybe 10% of them I'm right on, maybe 90%, I dunno. Fun to think about though. Example on the WTC6 missile: If that *object* hadn't clipped the north tower, it would have barrelled directly into the base of WTC7, which would have created a big ugly gash, and would have made the WTC7 collapse quite believable. Or, maybe it was intentional to destroy #6- what was removed from those US customs safes which were claimed on insurance? The safes were obliderated and contents were insured. If one were going to do an inside job for money and power, removing goods then claiming them on insurance is a nice little sub-ploy. Fun to think about. Not very consequential. But - we gotta remember that the WTC7 talk also started as an outlandish silly theory. Now, most people will look at it and agree on controlled demo :)
240, it's clear your a well read and knowlegable guy. I would use the intellect to hammer the obvious......the other stuff is very, very questionable and subsequently makes your SOLID arguements appear........weaker.
Let the detractors refute the OBVIOUS.............they can't IMO.
-
Good idea.
-
240, back in the day I thought you were talking of setting up a website with information?
-
Good idea.
I believe so. Work on the STRONG points........the rest will take care of itself. :)
-
GreatFinn,
Do you believe the BBC has really lost every recording, tape, and archive from 9/11?
Do you believe they have no copy of their broadcast on 9/11/2001?
thanks.
And again, you have just questions, no answers...Dear Little Motherhumper, try to understand: in situation like that, every kind of shit happens, and again, you don't have any prove that it isn't true. You just assume it isn't true, and just about everyone sane adult assume by that, that you are an idiot. This is how it goes. Just deliver some hard evidence, not just stupid internet lies and rumors like you have done whole time. When 9/11 was just happened, there were live news feed all over the world, and I watch just about every minute of it. After that, I have been watching hours and hours different documents about it, including some classified stuff, and nothing indicates that there were something else going on than you see with your own eyes. Whole theory of yours is based on overwhelming ignorance, you don't understand what you see, you simply don't have the intelligence to understand this matter, so please please pretty please, why don't you stop this nonsense?
-
And again, you have just questions, no answers...Dear Little Motherhumper, try to understand: in situation like that, every kind of shit happens, and again, you don't have any prove that it isn't true. You just assume it isn't true, and just about everyone sane adult assume by that, that you are an idiot. This is how it goes. Just deliver some hard evidence, not just stupid internet lies and rumors like you have done whole time. When 9/11 was just happened, there were live news feed all over the world, and I watch just about every minute of it. After that, I have been watching hours and hours different documents about it, including some classified stuff, and nothing indicates that there were something else going on than you see with your own eyes. Whole theory of yours is based on overwhelming ignorance, you don't understand what you see, you simply don't have the intelligence to understand this matter, so please please pretty please, why don't you stop this nonsense?
You're trying to paint the whole day with one broad brush. "In situations like this, every kind of shit happens".
I disagree.
BBC predicted that a standing 47-story skyscraper with moderate fires was going to collapse. THey reported it had collapsed, even as it stood in the background.
You can blame poor info/timing for many things, but not the reporting of FUTURE EVENTS.
Then, to lie and say the media giant BBC "lost" all its copies of the footage it aired on 9/11... well, you don't lie unless you have something to hide. And it's a horrible, insulting lie at that.
-
You're trying to paint the whole day with one broad brush. "In situations like this, every kind of shit happens".
I disagree.
BBC predicted that a standing 47-story skyscraper with moderate fires was going to collapse. THey reported it had collapsed, even as it stood in the background.
You can blame poor info/timing for many things, but not the reporting of FUTURE EVENTS.
Then, to lie and say the media giant BBC "lost" all its copies of the footage it aired on 9/11... well, you don't lie unless you have something to hide. And it's a horrible, insulting lie at that.
240, doesn't everyone read TODAY'S news, to find out what's happening TOMMORROW?
The BBC did. ::)
-
I wish people here would take a position on this, instead of getting quiet.
All the folks who call me a crazy CTer, step up.
Tell us whether you believe the BBC lost every recorded backup from 9/11/01.
And if not, why did they lie?
-
I wish people here would take a position on this, instead of getting quiet.
All the folks who call me a crazy CTer, step up.
Tell us whether you believe the BBC lost every recorded backup from 9/11/01.
And if not, why did they lie?
240, when confronted with facts............they leave.
-
I wish people here would take a position on this, instead of getting quiet.
All the folks who call me a crazy CTer, step up.
Tell us whether you believe the BBC lost every recorded backup from 9/11/01.
And if not, why did they lie?
How about you list all the possible explanations besides the one you are trying to lead people to.
-
How about you list all the possible explanations besides the one you are trying to lead people to.
The editor of the BBC said that they had no footage from 9/11.
This simply isn't believable.
He said this only after it was revealed their reporter reported the building fell 26 minutes before it did.
I cannot think of any explanation for this obvious lie. Can you?
-
The editor of the BBC said that they had no footage from 9/11.
This simply isn't believable.
He said this only after it was revealed their reporter reported the building fell 26 minutes before it did.
I cannot think of any explanation for this obvious lie. Can you?
one Senior fire officer reported to them there was a bulge and it might collapse.. local media was reporting it may collapse..looks like they got "might collapse" confused with collapse
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/03/part_of_the_conspiracy_2.html
-
one Senior fire officer reported to them there was a bulge and it might collapse.. local media was reporting it may collapse..looks like they got "might collapse" confused with collapse
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/03/part_of_the_conspiracy_2.html
Before I address this redirect you're attempting -
kh300, do you honestly believe the BBC lost every tape from 911? Yes or no?
-
Before I address this redirect you're attempting -
kh300, do you honestly believe the BBC lost every tape from 911? Yes or no?
they completely fucked up the biggest news story in decades.. so im sure they have the ability to fuck up their recording or whatever.. or how about the fact that they were just trying to cover up their own asses.
do you really think some guys in black trenchcoats came in there and held up the studio and stole them. and then on their way out they said "o ya, if you tell anybody well hunt you all down and kill you"
-
they completely fucked up the biggest news story in decades.. so im sure they have the ability to fuck up their recording or whatever.. or how about the fact that they were just trying to cover up their own asses.
You think they "have the ability to fck up their own recording or whatever"?
Wow.
You're a gullible bastard who believes what feels right. Good luck with that.
-
You think they "have the ability to fck up their own recording or whatever"?
Wow.
You're a gullible bastard who believes what feels right. Good luck with that.
this is comming from a guy who thinks alex jones and conspericy sites are gospel. you have 0 scientific or direct evidence to your theories.. only circumstantial and you call me gullible? its much more believable to think they were covering their asses for fear of loosing their credibility.. so explain to me what you think happend to the tapes. did the trench coat guys come in and threaten everyone?
-
this is comming from a guy who thinks alex jones and conspericy sites are gospel. you have 0 scientific or direct evidence to your theories.. only circumstantial and you call me gullible? its much more believable to think they were covering their asses for fear of loosing their credibility.. so explain to me what you think happend to the tapes. did the trench coat guys come in and threaten everyone?
I believe the tapes exist, obviously. I believe the editor lied.
Look, local TV stations keep their shit in a basement, offsite, and in digital archives on the other side of the country. It's standard practice for legal purposes and for general operations.
The BBC is the largest broadcasting corporation in the world.
911 was the biggest day in the history of the modern world.
Do you have the spine to answer - do you believe they lost every recording and backup from that day?
-
The editor of the BBC said that they had no footage from 9/11.
This simply isn't believable.
He said this only after it was revealed their reporter reported the building fell 26 minutes before it did.
I cannot think of any explanation for this obvious lie. Can you?
no kidding.
But what are the possible explanations to as to why they are saying that?
-
no kidding.
But what are the possible explanations to as to why they are saying that?
Their way of avoiding answering "Why did your reporter say a 47-story building had collapsed when it was in plain view?" was "we can't comment, cause we don't have a copy"!
They lied about having the recording so they didn't have to answer the Q.
They played the incompetence card to avoid the complicity/foreknowledge issue, just like every other group who let 911 happen.
-
Their way of avoiding answering "Why did your reporter say a 47-story building had collapsed when it was in plain view?" was "we can't comment, cause we don't have a copy"!
They lied about having the recording so they didn't have to answer the Q.
They played the incompetence card to avoid the complicity/foreknowledge issue, just like every other group who let 911 happen.
OK, so we have as possible reasons:
1. They lied about having the recording so they didn't have to answer that the Q.
2. They played the incompetence card
Was it possible that the reporter or who ever was feeding the reporter made as mistake?......WTC "3-4-5-6-7-8-9"
Is it possible that "losing" the tape that shows this error is attempt to not to open a can of warms that include 9/11 CT's and incompetency?
-
nah, reporter said 'building 7, soloman brothers building, a 47 story building"
since it was almost 7 hours since towers fell, there was no mixup.
BBC is the largest media organization in the world.
Why would they lie about something as insanely stupid and obvious as not having any copies of 9/11? My own belief - they were fed info on that day from someone who knew WTC7 was to be brought down in a controlled demolition.
This person or persons knew there were explosives and the building was wired. Can I stop there? Already, this means the BBC is getting info from a person(s) who wired a federal building for demoiltion. The fact they reported it WITHOUT EVEN LOOKING UP is scary too. They repeated it without checking.
And, instead of naming the source of this info, they deny the snafu by saying there is no proof it even exists.
-
nah, reporter said 'building 7, soloman brothers building, a 47 story building"
since it was almost 7 hours since towers fell, there was no mixup.
BBC is the largest media organization in the world.
Why would they lie about something as insanely stupid and obvious as not having any copies of 9/11? My own belief - they were fed info on that day from someone who knew WTC7 was to be brought down in a controlled demolition.
This person or persons knew there were explosives and the building was wired. Can I stop there? Already, this means the BBC is getting info from a person(s) who wired a federal building for demoiltion. The fact they reported it WITHOUT EVEN LOOKING UP is scary too. They repeated it without checking.
And, instead of naming the source of this info, they deny the snafu by saying there is no proof it even exists.
240.....you must remember, people lie, leaders lie, countries lie. Unless forced to be truthful................ ..they won't.
If your truth searching, I doubt you'll find it.
-
nah, i'm not truth searching.
i just want the little bitches here to take a position, and say they believe the BBC, or the BBC is lying. They're scared to say either.
-
I dont understand these people. Bush doesnt want a good investigation about the incident. That my friend is enough reason for bright minds to know he's involved. Grandpa bush, dad bush and child bush. 3 fucking presidents in one family, thats absurd.
-
nah, reporter said 'building 7, soloman brothers building, a 47 story building"
since it was almost 7 hours since towers fell, there was no mixup.
BBC is the largest media organization in the world.
Why would they lie about something as insanely stupid and obvious as not having any copies of 9/11? My own belief - they were fed info on that day from someone who knew WTC7 was to be brought down in a controlled demolition.
This person or persons knew there were explosives and the building was wired. Can I stop there? Already, this means the BBC is getting info from a person(s) who wired a federal building for demoiltion. The fact they reported it WITHOUT EVEN LOOKING UP is scary too. They repeated it without checking.
And, instead of naming the source of this info, they deny the snafu by saying there is no proof it even exists.
You still didn't answer the last question.
"Is it possible that "losing" the tape that shows this error is attempt to not to open a can of worms that include 9/11 CT's and incompetency?"
Additionally, why feed a news station something that's going to happen before it happens? There's no point. Why not just let them report it?
That makes 3 questions.... please answer them.
BTW every thing in bold is pure speculation. You are taking your opinion and creating logic around it. Stick to the facts and the possibilities.
What you can't do is rule out the other possibilities, although you try sometimes by not even addressing them.
-
nah, i'm not truth searching.
i just want the little bitches here to take a position, and say they believe the BBC, or the BBC is lying. They're scared to say either.
240.......don't hold your breath.